Watching the instant-analysis of the Lacey Peterson trial and the reviews of the various performances, I was struck by the one consistent theme. Nearly every commentator was gushing about the way Geragos used . . . (hushed and awed tones . . .) TWO PLASMA SCREEN TVs. Some even repeated the word “plasma” as if catching a glimpse of a miracle. The best part was that one person couldn’t really articulate a reason why the screens mattered in the case.
Anyone still have any doubt that we are the TV generation(s)?
Memo to litigators in high visibility cases – the price of entry has now been raised by two plasma screen TVs. If you don’t bring them, you aren’t a serious player anymore. Forget the jury consultants, the evidence and the color of your suit. Plasma, baby. Top legal tech trend of the year – it’s right here.
You heard it here first. For free. Remember that when you are paying litigation consultants top dollar to tell you the same thing.
The remaining question, though, is whether it’s better to go with a few huge screens or a smaller individual plasma screen for each juror. I’m leaning toward the big screens. Unless, of course, you can imply that you will let the jurors take the individual ones home and survive the objection with only an instruction for the jury to disregard the comment rather than a mistrial and contempt citation. Just kidding – I wouldn’t ever recommend the first choice amd I’d bet on the contempt citation and mistrial every time if you did try it. (NOTE: Last sentence required in the event of humor-impaired readers.)
The new Beck lyric (dedicated to Ken Forton):
Where it’s at (for lawyers)
Two plasmas and a microphone.